LA Vs. NAVSI VAGHAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.Shukla, learned advocate for the petitioner company and Mr.Dave, learned advocate for the respondent workmen.

(2.) In this group of petitions, the company (original opponent before the learned Labour Court) has challenged separate but similar awards passed by the learned Labour Court in separate reference cases whereby the learned Labour Court directed the company to treat them in service/to reinstate the claimants - workmen and to pay 50% backwages. The relevant details i.e. number of petitions and the name of the concerned petitioner, respective reference case filed by the claimant and the date of award passed by the learned Labour Court in each reference case as well as total length of service of the concerned claimant (according to the claim of the company and according to the claimants) are summarized in below mentioned tabular statement: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_256_LAWS(GJH)8_2017_1.html</FRM> 2. 1 In view of the fact that learned advocates for the company and the claimants have declared and submitted that the facts and issues involved in captioned petitions, i.e. in the respective reference cases are almost identical and also in view of the fact that learned advocates for the company and the claimants have put forward common and similar submissions in respect of each reference case and awards that the the captioned petitions are decided by this common judgment.

(3.) So far as the factual background is concerned, it has emerged from the record that the petitioner company has its industrial establishment (factory) at Valsad, Gujarat, wherein the petitioner company is engaged in the activity of manufacturing piston for oil engines. The respondents were employed by the petitioner company.